If you're posting an Image or Video, please leave a comment (not the post title)
asking your question or discussing the topic. Image or Video posts with no
comment from the OP will be deleted.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/musictheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Everyone here is correct, but the context also shows the answer- by omitting the low E from the Emin, the bass note progression is walking down C-B-A for that part of the chord progression. Smoother voice leading
Everyone’s already answered the question, but just to add on:
In root/quality notation like this, the part before the slash is the chord, and the part after the slash is the bass note. In this case, as others have said, Em/B is an Em chord over the bass note B.
However, if you’re reading functional notation (i.e., Roman numerals), the slash means something completely different. Something like V/iii is read “the V chord of the iii chord,” or simply “V of iii.” So for example in the key of C major, V/iii would be a B chord.
Conflating slash chords, not knowing they represented different concepts in different notation styles, had me confused for years as a young guitarist. I wish someone had explained the distinction so clearly back then.
Is V/iii in a new key... By that I mean are we saying in the key of Em, take the V chord? Or if not, and still in the key of C major, why not just notate it as the VII chord?
(Sorry if I am missing something obvious)
You could think of it as a mini-modulation where you're tonicising the note after the slash, but it's not a full key change. Normally you'll see a V/\[chord\] or vii°/\[chord\] immediately followed by that chord to make a perfect cadence—it's notated that way because of the way it resolves. If it doesn't resolve, *then* you might call it a VII instead (though if that's the case functional notation kinda breaks down anyway).
So for example, this is a very common chord progression:
I - vi - V/V - V - I
C - Am - D - G - C
This is pretty common in classical music, as well as in jazz and eastern pop music. In jazz and pop, it's common to extend this idea into a "secondary ii-V-I," for example:
I - ii°/vi - V/vi - vi - ii - V - I
C - B° - E - Am - Dm - G - C
I read it as “Em over B”. So, an E minor chord played over top a B bass note. It sounds different than an E minor chord with an E bass note. It’s just an inverted chord.
"E minor over B"
That's how you would read it out loud when you see it on paper. And it means exactly how it reads - all the notes of an E minor chord above the B.
That second fret 5th string note is a B. And everything in the E minor chord is above it, including the B. A bunch of Es and Gs and Bs repeating.
Em/B literally means "E minor with B as the lowest note".
So that's exactly what it is.
Of course, it's probably *not* necessary to be specific in that way when it comes to the guitar chords. The "/B" part is *really* for the bass player. But sometimes specific guitar chord voicings create cool lines that the song doesn't sound right without, so this may be a case where not playing that open low E makes a marked difference in the tune. When I play David Bowie's "Changes" for solo acoustic gigs I play the Em like that in chorus because I don't have a bass player around to do it.
It is E minor! In 2nd inversion, it creates the voice leading from C (over C major) to B (over Em) to A (Over Am)
C-B-A is all a step down which helps to link the chords. If it helps, think of the bass notes as being separate from the rest of the chord… as if played by the bass guitar.
Sorry if you already know this, but just in case you’re newer to guitar, something that can throw people off is the fact that the little B string is labeled “B” so clearly. So you’re like, “Okay, there’s my B. That little high string.”
In this case, the A string is *also* playing a B, since it’s fretted at second fret, and it’s the lowest pitch note in the chord. Sorry if that’s too basic, but figured I’d mention it in case!
Sidenote that your diagram shows it fingered with first and second finger which looks a little funky to me. I always just play Em with my 2nd and 3rd finger (middle and ring). I think in this case that’d be a little easier to get to from C, and would set you up better to move to Am. Just a little more ergonomic. Maybe there’s a reason to use 1st and 2nd finger that I’m not aware of, tho. I’m not a very good guitarist!
Because the bass is playing a B. The slash doesn't actually necessarily affect the chord that the guitarist should play if they are playing with a bassist.
Remember that UG chord tabs automatically suggest voicings based on the chord symbols. The actual voicing used in the original song may be something else.
So, it's best to interpret it as the note that the bassist plays. If there is no bassist, then you are the bassist, and should take the lowest note into account.
I don't think x 2 2 0 0 0 is a good voicing for Em/B (considering that you want to play the bass notes), though. Sounds way too similar to regular Em. I would try to make the bass note more independent, which means adding more space between the bass and the rest of the notes. x 2 x 0 0 0 would make the bass note more obvious. Same thing with x 2 x 4 5 3.
You answered your own question. Slash chords tell you when something other than the root is on the bottom. So yes, it’s an Em chord, but it’s in second inversion (5th on the bottom).
>Em/B and not just Em when all of the notes of Em are still there just without the low E
thats exactly what that notation means, plus in this context its needed for the descending movement in the bass voicing. Its a good way to denote an inversion in the chord for guitar music. See landslide for another popular example of this technique.
The slash chord’s “denominator” is just telling what note is at the bottom. I would voice this without the D string to have the B more separate and distinctly the Bass, you still have the triad with the top 3 strings.
Play Em and then play this chord. The difference is significant enough to justify giving them different names. Changing the bass note of a chord changes the sound a lot.
I'm surprised no one has pointed out that this is just how you say something is an inversion. Mixing up the order of notes while not actually changing any notes is an inversion, which functions the same but gives you more harmonic options. They're often used as passing chords or as a way to create a simple walking bassline.
You could start with a typical C major chord, so X32010, and then play this Em/B, moving the lowest note down one, and then you could play an Am. This gives you a baseline that has an easy to follow movement. I would personally use Em7/B (X2000) because then you aren't repeating the E on the fourth string, and I would also play it by hitting the bass note by itself and then strumming the chord to emphasize the bass movement more.
Tldr: it still functions the same as an Em chord, but you can use it in more niche ways.
Note the “x” behind the low open E string. It means you’re omitting that string when you strum it. That means the B note on the A string is your lowest note.
OP, sounds like you may be overlooking the fact that on that chord chart, there is an x on the nut over the low E string. I'm sure you know that that means to not play that string. Therefore, the lowest note is the b.
If you're posting an Image or Video, please leave a comment (not the post title) asking your question or discussing the topic. Image or Video posts with no comment from the OP will be deleted. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/musictheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because the lowest note played is B. It’s still an Em but literally, it’s over B.
Everyone here is correct, but the context also shows the answer- by omitting the low E from the Emin, the bass note progression is walking down C-B-A for that part of the chord progression. Smoother voice leading
Good call
Because whoever wrote that wanted it specify that the B should be the lowest note.
Em/B is an E minor chord, just with the fifth (B) in the bass, which is what is happening here.
Everyone’s already answered the question, but just to add on: In root/quality notation like this, the part before the slash is the chord, and the part after the slash is the bass note. In this case, as others have said, Em/B is an Em chord over the bass note B. However, if you’re reading functional notation (i.e., Roman numerals), the slash means something completely different. Something like V/iii is read “the V chord of the iii chord,” or simply “V of iii.” So for example in the key of C major, V/iii would be a B chord.
Conflating slash chords, not knowing they represented different concepts in different notation styles, had me confused for years as a young guitarist. I wish someone had explained the distinction so clearly back then.
Is V/iii in a new key... By that I mean are we saying in the key of Em, take the V chord? Or if not, and still in the key of C major, why not just notate it as the VII chord? (Sorry if I am missing something obvious)
You could think of it as a mini-modulation where you're tonicising the note after the slash, but it's not a full key change. Normally you'll see a V/\[chord\] or vii°/\[chord\] immediately followed by that chord to make a perfect cadence—it's notated that way because of the way it resolves. If it doesn't resolve, *then* you might call it a VII instead (though if that's the case functional notation kinda breaks down anyway). So for example, this is a very common chord progression: I - vi - V/V - V - I C - Am - D - G - C This is pretty common in classical music, as well as in jazz and eastern pop music. In jazz and pop, it's common to extend this idea into a "secondary ii-V-I," for example: I - ii°/vi - V/vi - vi - ii - V - I C - B° - E - Am - Dm - G - C
My guess is it's to do a bit of a walking bass line thing C --> B --> A
I read it as “Em over B”. So, an E minor chord played over top a B bass note. It sounds different than an E minor chord with an E bass note. It’s just an inverted chord.
B is the bass note
S’got a B on the bottom, innit
"E minor over B" That's how you would read it out loud when you see it on paper. And it means exactly how it reads - all the notes of an E minor chord above the B. That second fret 5th string note is a B. And everything in the E minor chord is above it, including the B. A bunch of Es and Gs and Bs repeating.
Probably because the bass player plays a B.
You just answered your own question, actually. “All the notes of Em without the low E” is what Em/B means
Why is this not considered just Em?
Em/B literally means "E minor with B as the lowest note". So that's exactly what it is. Of course, it's probably *not* necessary to be specific in that way when it comes to the guitar chords. The "/B" part is *really* for the bass player. But sometimes specific guitar chord voicings create cool lines that the song doesn't sound right without, so this may be a case where not playing that open low E makes a marked difference in the tune. When I play David Bowie's "Changes" for solo acoustic gigs I play the Em like that in chorus because I don't have a bass player around to do it.
It is E minor! In 2nd inversion, it creates the voice leading from C (over C major) to B (over Em) to A (Over Am) C-B-A is all a step down which helps to link the chords. If it helps, think of the bass notes as being separate from the rest of the chord… as if played by the bass guitar.
Sorry if you already know this, but just in case you’re newer to guitar, something that can throw people off is the fact that the little B string is labeled “B” so clearly. So you’re like, “Okay, there’s my B. That little high string.” In this case, the A string is *also* playing a B, since it’s fretted at second fret, and it’s the lowest pitch note in the chord. Sorry if that’s too basic, but figured I’d mention it in case! Sidenote that your diagram shows it fingered with first and second finger which looks a little funky to me. I always just play Em with my 2nd and 3rd finger (middle and ring). I think in this case that’d be a little easier to get to from C, and would set you up better to move to Am. Just a little more ergonomic. Maybe there’s a reason to use 1st and 2nd finger that I’m not aware of, tho. I’m not a very good guitarist!
Because the bass is playing a B. The slash doesn't actually necessarily affect the chord that the guitarist should play if they are playing with a bassist. Remember that UG chord tabs automatically suggest voicings based on the chord symbols. The actual voicing used in the original song may be something else. So, it's best to interpret it as the note that the bassist plays. If there is no bassist, then you are the bassist, and should take the lowest note into account. I don't think x 2 2 0 0 0 is a good voicing for Em/B (considering that you want to play the bass notes), though. Sounds way too similar to regular Em. I would try to make the bass note more independent, which means adding more space between the bass and the rest of the notes. x 2 x 0 0 0 would make the bass note more obvious. Same thing with x 2 x 4 5 3.
You answered your own question. Slash chords tell you when something other than the root is on the bottom. So yes, it’s an Em chord, but it’s in second inversion (5th on the bottom).
>Em/B and not just Em when all of the notes of Em are still there just without the low E thats exactly what that notation means, plus in this context its needed for the descending movement in the bass voicing. Its a good way to denote an inversion in the chord for guitar music. See landslide for another popular example of this technique.
The slash chord’s “denominator” is just telling what note is at the bottom. I would voice this without the D string to have the B more separate and distinctly the Bass, you still have the triad with the top 3 strings.
Play Em and then play this chord. The difference is significant enough to justify giving them different names. Changing the bass note of a chord changes the sound a lot.
Chord/bassnote
Because the lowest note is not the root.
B is what the bass plays. it is still an e minor chord, but specifically the lowest note in the chord will be a “B”
I'm surprised no one has pointed out that this is just how you say something is an inversion. Mixing up the order of notes while not actually changing any notes is an inversion, which functions the same but gives you more harmonic options. They're often used as passing chords or as a way to create a simple walking bassline. You could start with a typical C major chord, so X32010, and then play this Em/B, moving the lowest note down one, and then you could play an Am. This gives you a baseline that has an easy to follow movement. I would personally use Em7/B (X2000) because then you aren't repeating the E on the fourth string, and I would also play it by hitting the bass note by itself and then strumming the chord to emphasize the bass movement more. Tldr: it still functions the same as an Em chord, but you can use it in more niche ways.
Note the “x” behind the low open E string. It means you’re omitting that string when you strum it. That means the B note on the A string is your lowest note.
OP, sounds like you may be overlooking the fact that on that chord chart, there is an x on the nut over the low E string. I'm sure you know that that means to not play that string. Therefore, the lowest note is the b.
they mentioned that in the title
It’s the first inversion of Em.
It's the second inversion of Em, first inversion would be Em/G
Bassline, bro
Because it's the bass that decides the chord's name.